The Baffling Debate

It really is baffling. Pretty much all of our disenchantment in health care is due to the fact that it is funded through tightly regulated employer based pools. Chris Moody tries to point out this absurdity. The progressives fan hatred of the system that they created in their grub for even greater power.

Unfortunately, I can't really fault the progressives for the tactics they use. The ideologies of the Marxian tradition measure effectiveness of a tactic in the ability of the tactic to advance the cause. A progressive takes great pains to avoid public debate about the long term direction of the country (should we remain a free people or become a socialist state?) Instead, advance the cause by framing issues in ways to advance the cause.

What pains me is that Libertarians enjoy lining up like sheep on the way to the slaughter house.

The progressives won the health care debate a half decade ago when they successfully framed the debate as a conflict between private health insurance or government health insurance?

Should the collective be publicly or privately owned?

The Libertarians lined up like sheep to argue for private ownership of the collective. They failed to realize that in doing so they capitulated on the real argument.

The real argument is whether or not a collective pool is the best way to fund health care.

Insurance pools the resources of a group to fund health care.

This sounds like a good idea at first glance. The problem is that once people make the decision to fund care through a collective pool, the dynamics of the collective take over and the needs of the individual go unmet.

The Republicans lost the war when they accepted the false dichotomy as the basis of the debate. From the moment that the Republicans accepted the false dichotomy, it was only a matter of time until a brave number of souls were able to manufacture an economic crisis and a change campaign to finish the process of collectivization.

Don't you see? The moment that people accepted that health care must be funded by a pool, then the logic of the pool of takes over.

This logic is at odds with the needs of the individual. Even worse, the logic of the pool is that the pool will seek to grow until it becomes all encompassing. The progressive need simply wait until the pool is so powerful and so at odds with the needs of the people that they people will fall for a change campaign to nationalize the pool.

Chris Moody finds it absurd that Progressives are use our dissatisfaction with the current collective system to argue for greater collectivization.

When, in reality, the true absurdity was that Libertarians and Republicans had lined up to argue for private ownership of the collective when collectivization (employer based insurance pools) is diametrically opposed to the cause of freedom.